Does the Green-Finance Policy Mitigate Corporate Environmental Misconducts? —A Quasi-Natural Experiment Based on the Green Finance Reform and Innovation Pilot Zones
DU Xingqiang, XIE Yuhui, ZENG Quan
Center for Accounting Studies, Xiamen University; Accounting Department, Xiamen University
Summary:
In 2017, China established the green finance reform and innovation pilot zones in eight prefecture-level cities in Zhejiang, Jiangxi, Guangdong, Guizhou and Xinjiang provinces. Prior studies have explored economic consequences of the policy on the green finance reform and innovation pilot zones (the pilot policy; hereinafter similarly) in the facets of urban ozone pollution, corporate green innovation, corporate production efficiency and pollution emissions. However, the effects of the pilot policies on corporate environmental misconducts have been ignored. Against this unique setting of the green finance reform and innovation pilot zones, this study examines whether the pilot policy affects corporate environmental misconducts and further investigates differences in this effect between polluting and non-polluting industries. The pilot policy can mitigate environmental misconducts by the conduits of green transformation, abnormal financing constraints and financial institutions' external monitoring. First, the pilot policy encourages and guides the inflow of various resources into technology upgrading projects and green industries, motivates firms to engage in green innovation actively, and promotes transformation and upgrade. Second, the pilot policy increases excess financing constraints induced by pollution, raises the costs of environmental pollution for firms, and inevitably drives them to pay attention to environmental performance. Lastly, the pilot policy strengthens the external supervision of financial institutions on corporate environmental performance by putting forward more supervision and information disclosure requirements for financial institutions in environmental protection, and then inhibits their environmental violations. Based on the above discussions, this study predicts a mitigating effect of the pilot policy on environmental misconducts of firms in the pilot zones. Employing a sample of all A-share listed firms over 2014-2019 and using a DID (difference-in-difference) design based on a quasi-natural experiment about the green finance reform and innovation pilot zones, this study finds that, for listed firms in pilot zones, the likelihood of environmental misconduct is significantly lower after the implementation of pilot policies than before. This finding suggests that pilot policies curb environmental wrongdoings. Moreover, the mitigating effect of the pilot policy on corporate environmental misconducts is more pronounced for firms in polluting industries than firms in non-polluting industries. Above findings are robust to the sensitivity tests using the degree of corporate environmental irregularity, controlling for sample balance by the propensity score matching approach and addressing omitted variables by the firm-level fixed effect model. The channel tests show that the pilot policy affects corporate environmental misconducts by green transformation, excess financing constraints and environmental monitoring from financial institutions. Subsample tests reveal that the mitigating effect of the pilot policy on environmental misconducts is more prominent for firms with small scale (with low media coverage, and in heavily air pollution areas). This study has two contributions listed below. First, this study examines the impact of the pilot policy on environmental misconducts from the perspective of incentive and monitoring, extends economic consequences of the pilot policy at the firm level, and analyses influential channels from the perspectives of green transformation, excess financing constraints and environmental monitoring from financial institutions. As such, this study provides important references for exploring the application and implement of the pilot policy. Second, the findings that the effect of the pilot policy on environmental misconducts is more prominent for firms in polluting industries (with small scale, with low media coverage, in heavily air pollution areas), provides crucial references for how the heterogeneity of firms' external environment moderate the impact of the pilot policy on environmental misconducts. This study has several policy implications as follow: First, regulators should improve the implementation rules on green financial systems, summarize experiences on the pilot policy, and nationally promote green finance policy in proper time. Second, administrative agencies must enhance the monitoring of financial institutions in environmental governance and draw lessons from the implementation of pilot policies Lastly, policy designers need to consider how to integrate market means and tools into policy design, and eventually improve the efficiency of social governance by taking the critical role of market in resource allocation. This study has the following three limitations. First, this study views the pilot policy as homogeneous, thus, future research can further examine the impacts of the heterogeneity in the pilot policy on environmental governance. Second, this study constructs a quasi-natural experiment based on the pilot zones, and future research needs to conduct further analyses after the green financial policy is implemented nationally. Third, due to data limitation, this study does not consider the differences in pilot policy enforcement, and it can be addressed in the future when the relevant data is more complete.
杜兴强, 谢裕慧, 曾泉. 绿色金融政策抑制了企业的环境违规吗?——基于绿色金融改革创新试验区的一项准自然实验[J]. 金融研究, 2024, 527(5): 132-149.
DU Xingqiang, XIE Yuhui, ZENG Quan. Does the Green-Finance Policy Mitigate Corporate Environmental Misconducts? —A Quasi-Natural Experiment Based on the Green Finance Reform and Innovation Pilot Zones. Journal of Financial Research, 2024, 527(5): 132-149.
[1]陈国进、丁赛杰、赵向琴和蒋晓宇,2021,《中国绿色金融政策、融资成本与企业绿色转型——基于央行担保品政策视角》,《金融研究》第12期,第75~95页。 [2]崔惠玉、王宝珠和徐颖,2023,《绿色金融创新、金融资源配置与企业污染减排》,《中国工业经济》第10期,第118~136页。 [3]金祥义、张文菲和施炳展,2022,《绿色金融促进了中国出口贸易发展吗?》,《金融研究》第5期,第38~56页。 [4]刘秉镰和孙鹏博,2022,《国家级金融改革试验区如何影响碳生产率》,《经济学动态》第9期,第71~90页。 [5]刘运国和刘梦宁,2015,《雾霾影响了重污染企业的盈余管理吗?——基于政治成本假说的考察》,《会计研究》第3期,第26~33页。 [6]祁怀锦和刘斯琴,2023,《绿色金融政策促进企业绿色创新吗——来自绿色金融改革创新试验区的证据》,《当代财经》第3期,第94~105页。 [7]齐绍洲、林屾和崔静波,2018,《环境权益交易市场能否诱发绿色创新?——基于我国上市公司绿色专利数据的证据》,《经济研究》第12期,第129~143页。 [8]苏冬蔚和连莉莉,2018,《绿色信贷是否影响重污染企业的投融资行为?》,《金融研究》第12期,第123~137页。 [9]王班班和齐绍洲,2016,《市场型和命令型政策工具的节能减排技术创新效应——基于中国工业行业专利数据的实证》,《中国工业经济》第6期,第91~108页。 [10]王馨和王营,2021,《绿色信贷政策增进绿色创新研究》,《管理世界》第6期,第173~188页。 [11]王修华、刘锦华和赵亚雄,2021,《绿色金融改革创新试验区的成效测度》,《数量经济技术经济研究》第10期,第107~127页。 [12]王印红和李萌竹,2017,《地方政府生态环境治理注意力研究——基于30个省市政府工作报告(2006—2015)文本分析》,《中国人口·资源与环境》第2期,第28~35页。 [13]魏志华、曾爱民和李博,2014,《金融生态环境与企业融资约束——基于中国上市公司的实证研究》,《会计研究》第5期,第73~80页。 [14]文书洋、刘浩和王慧,2022,《绿色金融、绿色创新与经济高质量发展》,《金融研究》第8期,第1~17页。 [15]文书洋、张琳和刘锡良,2021,《我们为什么需要绿色金融?——从全球经验事实到基于经济增长框架的理论解释》,《金融研究》第12期,第20~37页。 [16]张坤鑫,2021,《地方政府注意力与环境政策执行力的倒U形关系研究》,《公共管理评论》第4期,第132~161页。 [17]张振华、汪京、冯严超和田文佳,2022,《绿色金融改革创新试验区对臭氧污染的影响效应》,《中国人口·资源与环境》第12期,第52~65页。 [18]中国人民银行研究局课题组,2023,《绿色金融改革创新试验区建设进展及经验》,《中国金融》第6期,第57~59页。 [19]周肖肖、贾梦雨和赵鑫,2023,《绿色金融助推企业绿色技术创新的演化博弈动态分析和实证研究》,《中国工业经济》第6期,第43~61页。 [20]朱锐和刘梦婷,2022,《地区环境治理动机、政治关联与企业环境违规处罚——来自环保督政制度的新证据》,《财经理论与实践》第4期,第129~137页。 [21]左静静、邱保印和蒋挺,2022,《社会信用体系建设能否抑制企业环保失信?》,《外国经济与管理》第3期,第101~117页。 [22]Abebe, M. A., and K. Acharya, 2022, “Founder CEOs and Corporate Environmental Violations: Evidence from S&P 1500 Firms”, Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(3), pp. 1204~1219. [23]Dai, L., R. Shen, and B. Zhang, 2021, “Does the Media Spotlight Burn or Spur Innovation?”, Review of Accounting Studies, 26, pp. 343~390. [24]Goodman-Bacon, A., 2021, “Difference-in-differences with Variation in Treatment Timing”, Journal of Econometrics, 225(2), pp. 254~277. [25]Liu, C., 2018, “Are Women Greener? Corporate Gender Diversity and Environmental Violations”, Journal of Corporate Finance, 52, pp. 118~142. [26]McGuire, W., 2014, “The Effect of ISO 14001 on Environmental Regulatory Compliance in China”, Ecological Economics, 105, pp. 254~264. [27]Russo, M. V., and P. A. Fouts, 1997, “A Resource-Based Perspective on Corporate Environmental Performance and Profitability”, Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), pp. 534~559. [28]Vedung, E., 2017, Public Policy and Program Evaluation, Published by Routledge. [29]Wang, Z., and K. Dear, 2017, “Region and Firm Level Determinants of Environmental Regulation Violations: An Empirical Study in Chongqing, China”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 141, pp. 1011~1022. [30]Williamson, O. E., 2000, “The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking Ahead”, Journal of Economic Literature, 38(3), pp. 595~613. [31]Xu, Y., Y. Xuan, and G. Zheng, 2021, “Internet Searching and Stock Price Crash Risk: Evidence from a Quasi-Natural Experiment”, Journal of Financial Economics, 141(1), pp. 255~275.